FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Broken lives of immigrants deported from US to Mexico

Broken lives of immigrants deported from US to Mexico

(7:27) Almost two million immigrants have been deported from the US since Obama entered the White House. Many have lived and started a family for many years and have nothing to go back to in Mexico. BBC's Valeria Perasso reports from both sides of the border .

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1317 days ago)

To summarize this video, those Mexicans think the USA is the land of opportunity for them (and I agree with that). They illegally enter our country to get jobs and start a family. Then when they get caught, they are sent back to their own country where they came from. Now they create this sob story of a video to somehow make us feel bad like it's our fault they are being treated like criminals and sent back.

There are legal ways to get into the USA. You can file for a Visa, green card, and/or border crossing cards. If you don't follow the process and get caught, expect the appropriate ramifications.

ReplyVote up (237)down (170)
Original comment

To summarize this video, those Mexicans think the USA is the land of opportunity for them (and I agree with that). They illegally enter our country to get jobs and start a family. Then when they get caught, they are sent back to their own country where they came from. Now they create this sob story of a video to somehow make us feel bad like it's our fault they are being treated like criminals and sent back.

There are legal ways to get into the USA. You can file for a Visa, green card, and/or border crossing cards. If you don't follow the process and get caught, expect the appropriate ramifications.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Knobette Knobette (1316 days ago)

What's wrong with you? We are all human beings living on the same planet. How do millions of Mexicans born into poverty get a Green Card? They are not lazy, they are trying to improve their lives like you say they should be. But they are imprisoned in their own country.

ReplyVote up (166)down (164)
Original comment

What's wrong with you? We are all human beings living on the same planet. How do millions of Mexicans born into poverty get a Green Card? They are not lazy, they are trying to improve their lives like you say they should be. But they are imprisoned in their own country.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

So you are an advocate for someone to break the law to earn money? Why not just steal it then?

If you believe we should open our borders to all Mexicans to take the jobs of Americans then contact your senator and representative to have the laws changed. Your inaction on this matter means you're satisfied with the status quo.

ReplyVote up (170)down (165)
Original comment

So you are an advocate for someone to break the law to earn money? Why not just steal it then?

If you believe we should open our borders to all Mexicans to take the jobs of Americans then contact your senator and representative to have the laws changed. Your inaction on this matter means you're satisfied with the status quo.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Knobette Knobette (1315 days ago)

If we cared about our fellow human beings, laws would be different. People in charge only care about themselves, that's why the world is such a mess.

ReplyVote up (175)down (118)
Original comment

If we cared about our fellow human beings, laws would be different. People in charge only care about themselves, that's why the world is such a mess.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

The people in charge already have jobs so that's not why they create these laws. They do it to protect their fellow citizens from invasions of cheaper labor from outside sources.

I agree with you about helping our fellow human beings. If those Mexicans came into our country and we dropped our minimum wage laws, it would pretty much force everyone to work cheaper because we would have an over abundance of labor and not enough jobs. The supply and demand model would dictate that wages would be low and the hard working Mexicans would take the job for less than an American would. I have a lot of jobs I could give people but I'm not willing to pay $10.10/hour for.

I like Mexicans. The ones that have an H-1B Visa to pick our oranges seem to do the job better than we can. I recently saw a documentary on that. The Americans end up quitting after a couple days but those hard working Mexicans continue to do the job and do it well. But those specific Mexicans are doing it legally and the employer makes sure they are all documented properly.

ReplyVote up (163)down (170)
Original comment

The people in charge already have jobs so that's not why they create these laws. They do it to protect their fellow citizens from invasions of cheaper labor from outside sources.

I agree with you about helping our fellow human beings. If those Mexicans came into our country and we dropped our minimum wage laws, it would pretty much force everyone to work cheaper because we would have an over abundance of labor and not enough jobs. The supply and demand model would dictate that wages would be low and the hard working Mexicans would take the job for less than an American would. I have a lot of jobs I could give people but I'm not willing to pay $10.10/hour for.

I like Mexicans. The ones that have an H-1B Visa to pick our oranges seem to do the job better than we can. I recently saw a documentary on that. The Americans end up quitting after a couple days but those hard working Mexicans continue to do the job and do it well. But those specific Mexicans are doing it legally and the employer makes sure they are all documented properly.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1315 days ago)

I also have a lot of jobs I can give people but no one will clean my toilet for 50p an hour. I'm sure they would be queueing up if there was no minimum wage.

ReplyVote up (173)down (143)
Original comment

I also have a lot of jobs I can give people but no one will clean my toilet for 50p an hour. I'm sure they would be queueing up if there was no minimum wage.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

now that i think about it, i also have a lot of jobs on offer.

You know why homeless people don't take jobs from strangers who offer to help?

because they tried that and got beaten up and raped, so they'd rather stay homeless.

ReplyVote up (165)down (157)
Original comment

now that i think about it, i also have a lot of jobs on offer.

You know why homeless people don't take jobs from strangers who offer to help?

because they tried that and got beaten up and raped, so they'd rather stay homeless.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

Remove the minimum wage and open your borders to any foreigner who wants work and you will have people willing to do it for a lot less.

ReplyVote up (162)down (169)
Original comment

Remove the minimum wage and open your borders to any foreigner who wants work and you will have people willing to do it for a lot less.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1315 days ago)

People work for less than a living wage because they can - they get taxpayer's help. Otherwise, why would they work for money they can't live on.

So why should you, as a taxpayer, pay to subsidise a McDonald's 'below-living-wage 9; employee, when McDonald's made $1.5 billion profit in the 3rd quarter of 2013?

ReplyVote up (137)down (132)
Original comment

People work for less than a living wage because they can - they get taxpayer's help. Otherwise, why would they work for money they can't live on.

So why should you, as a taxpayer, pay to subsidise a McDonald's 'below-living-wage 9; employee, when McDonald's made $1.5 billion profit in the 3rd quarter of 2013?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

So here's some food for thought. What if McDonalds didn't hire anyone? Do you still have the belief that the government is subsidizing McDonalds when those former employees are not getting any salary?

This is my thought. It's better that McDonalds pays those workers some money than nothing at all. That way those employees don't get as large a benefit from the government. Raise the minimum wage, then McDonalds might replace their employees with vending machines. They already outsource some of their drive-through order takers to another country. When you buy from Burger King, they don't even give you a drink -- just an empty cup and you fill it yourself with your preferred drink from a machine.

I once asked you, and you never answered, what your definition of a living wage was. Do you think it means a single woman with 3 kids should be able to work as a cashier at McDonalds and get enough salary to pay for herself, a mortgage on a $250,000 house, those 3 kids and their needs, their college education, a car payment, clothing, electricity, water, food, sewage, garbage collection, etc. Or is it reasonable to expect that a single person working that minimum wage job might have to get some roomates, share an apartment instead of a house, split the utilities, buy clothes from a thrift shop, and drive a clunker car or a bicycle to work? Is it reasonable that they can eat cheaper foods or is a living wage expected to buy organic food and the best cuts of beef available?

ReplyVote up (178)down (162)
Original comment

So here's some food for thought. What if McDonalds didn't hire anyone? Do you still have the belief that the government is subsidizing McDonalds when those former employees are not getting any salary?

This is my thought. It's better that McDonalds pays those workers some money than nothing at all. That way those employees don't get as large a benefit from the government. Raise the minimum wage, then McDonalds might replace their employees with vending machines. They already outsource some of their drive-through order takers to another country. When you buy from Burger King, they don't even give you a drink -- just an empty cup and you fill it yourself with your preferred drink from a machine.

I once asked you, and you never answered, what your definition of a living wage was. Do you think it means a single woman with 3 kids should be able to work as a cashier at McDonalds and get enough salary to pay for herself, a mortgage on a $250,000 house, those 3 kids and their needs, their college education, a car payment, clothing, electricity, water, food, sewage, garbage collection, etc. Or is it reasonable to expect that a single person working that minimum wage job might have to get some roomates, share an apartment instead of a house, split the utilities, buy clothes from a thrift shop, and drive a clunker car or a bicycle to work? Is it reasonable that they can eat cheaper foods or is a living wage expected to buy organic food and the best cuts of beef available?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1315 days ago)

This is the dilemma. Let's expand McDonald's to mean companies in general. If companies turn to machines to replace their workers, then what do people buy their products with? If 1% are superrich and 99% are living on the breadline, then the only profitable businesses will be those providing low cost food, and the luxury yacht market. 99% of people on the breadline looking up to the 1% lounging about on their luxury yachts will result in mass unrest. The result is a US more like Somalia than Sweden.

For capitalism to be sustainable, there has to be a FLOW of money, not just movement from the bottom to the top.

Paying low paid workers more makes economic sense, because it means they have money to spend on non-essential items. Therefore companies like Apple can profit by serving 100% of the people rather than 1%. Even the experts say so. LINK

I don't know what a living wage should be, except that it should be high enough to get money flowing for a healthy economy.

ReplyVote up (206)down (156)
Original comment

This is the dilemma. Let's expand McDonald's to mean companies in general. If companies turn to machines to replace their workers, then what do people buy their products with? If 1% are superrich and 99% are living on the breadline, then the only profitable businesses will be those providing low cost food, and the luxury yacht market. 99% of people on the breadline looking up to the 1% lounging about on their luxury yachts will result in mass unrest. The result is a US more like Somalia than Sweden.

For capitalism to be sustainable, there has to be a FLOW of money, not just movement from the bottom to the top.

Paying low paid workers more makes economic sense, because it means they have money to spend on non-essential items. Therefore companies like Apple can profit by serving 100% of the people rather than 1%. Even the experts say so. LINK

I don't know what a living wage should be, except that it should be high enough to get money flowing for a healthy economy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

"Paying low paid workers more makes economic sense, because it means they have money to spend on non-essential items. " That may be true in a global sense but it is not true for an individual company. Each company looks to see how they can maximize their profits and if they have thousands of employees knocking on their door begging for a job at minimum wage, it doesn't make any sense to pay them more.

Do you think for one minute that a company producing widgets that costs them only $1 wouldn't sell it for a million dollars each if people were willing to pay that much? Should it be illegal to charge whatever the market will bear? When you look at it this way, you understand why I'm an advocate for removing the minimum wage. You have a surplus of people looking for work for lower than minimum but employers unwilling to pay the current minimum wage for those jobs so they do without hiring for optional jobs. Those jobless people are then getting 100% benefits from the government instead of partial payments.

"I don't know what a living wage should be, except that it should be high enough to get money flowing for a healthy economy." So you shouldn't be calling it a living wage any longer. Try calling it "excessive wage" so your vision of minimally skilled workers have enough disposable income to purchase unnecessary luxuries like an Apple Laptop.

ReplyVote up (188)down (153)
Original comment

"Paying low paid workers more makes economic sense, because it means they have money to spend on non-essential items. " That may be true in a global sense but it is not true for an individual company. Each company looks to see how they can maximize their profits and if they have thousands of employees knocking on their door begging for a job at minimum wage, it doesn't make any sense to pay them more.

Do you think for one minute that a company producing widgets that costs them only $1 wouldn't sell it for a million dollars each if people were willing to pay that much? Should it be illegal to charge whatever the market will bear? When you look at it this way, you understand why I'm an advocate for removing the minimum wage. You have a surplus of people looking for work for lower than minimum but employers unwilling to pay the current minimum wage for those jobs so they do without hiring for optional jobs. Those jobless people are then getting 100% benefits from the government instead of partial payments.

"I don't know what a living wage should be, except that it should be high enough to get money flowing for a healthy economy." So you shouldn't be calling it a living wage any longer. Try calling it "excessive wage" so your vision of minimally skilled workers have enough disposable income to purchase unnecessary luxuries like an Apple Laptop.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1315 days ago)

That's right. Paying low paid workers more is good for the global economy - so if you're smart, you will realise that caring only for yourself will backfire, because we are all a part of the global economy.

It may go against the grain for you, but helping the less fortunate is actually a win-win for all. We all live on this crowded planet together, and if we cooperate and help each other, a time will come when the US is more akin to Sweden than Somalia. Surely even you would prefer that.

ReplyVote up (186)down (153)
Original comment

That's right. Paying low paid workers more is good for the global economy - so if you're smart, you will realise that caring only for yourself will backfire, because we are all a part of the global economy.

It may go against the grain for you, but helping the less fortunate is actually a win-win for all. We all live on this crowded planet together, and if we cooperate and help each other, a time will come when the US is more akin to Sweden than Somalia. Surely even you would prefer that.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

"It may go against the grain for you, but helping the less fortunate is actually a win-win for all." So tell me how I personally benefit if I pay my employees more than they are worth? I will end up with less profits and less buying power for myself. Since those employees spend their money elsewhere, very little if any will make it back to my company.

Using some real figures. Let's say that I make $300,000 profit each year and have 10 employees. What you're saying is that I will personally benefit if I gave each of those employees a $30,000 salary increase. However, my math shows that I will personally end up with 0 profits and will need to close my business and not be able to pay my own bills. I do not sell things for individual employees, I sell to large businesses so I will probably get zero of that money back in sales to my employees.

So convince me that it is in my best interest to increase the wage of my employees because you haven't been successful yet.

ReplyVote up (129)down (144)
Original comment

"It may go against the grain for you, but helping the less fortunate is actually a win-win for all." So tell me how I personally benefit if I pay my employees more than they are worth? I will end up with less profits and less buying power for myself. Since those employees spend their money elsewhere, very little if any will make it back to my company.

Using some real figures. Let's say that I make $300,000 profit each year and have 10 employees. What you're saying is that I will personally benefit if I gave each of those employees a $30,000 salary increase. However, my math shows that I will personally end up with 0 profits and will need to close my business and not be able to pay my own bills. I do not sell things for individual employees, I sell to large businesses so I will probably get zero of that money back in sales to my employees.

So convince me that it is in my best interest to increase the wage of my employees because you haven't been successful yet.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1315 days ago)

You've asked me to convince you, so I'll give it my best shot. But I warn you, it make take you where you don't expect.

It has always fascinated me why perfectly intelligent people so often cannot see eye to eye. And that everybody thinks they are they always right, me included. But I've come to realise that being right is dependent on your perspective. Do you remember me asking you what outcome you want our economic system to result in? You said outcome 'A', I said outcome 'B'. I suspect that if we both had the same outcome, we would be agreeing on the means to get there. So we are actually both right, our outcomes are different.

So coming back to whether you pay your employees more - your outcome, the result you want to see, is that your bank balance is higher at the end of the year. And of course you'd be right - your bank balance will probably be lower.

But I ask you to question your outcome. You have said in the past that you have plenty of money, but you live a miserable existence. I'm sure I remember you describing your life as: "every day is one less miserable day to endure". I almost felt sorry for you. But notice this… money hasn't made you happy. So whether you make a bit more or a bit less next year, you'll probably still be living a miserable existence. And as an atheist, without heaven to look forward to, that's not ideal.

"So how can paying my employees more make me happy?" Good question. It depends on what happiness means to you, and only you can figure that out. For me in your position, paying employees more would make me feel good because helping people less well off than me, makes me feel good. I'm sure Richard Dawkins can explain why we've evolved to get pleasure from helping others less fortunate. My employees would probably smile more, which is contagious, releasing more endorphins through my body. They may even work harder, and speak good of me behind my back. It's nice to be liked.

But maybe that's too 'new age' or personal for you. You dabble in politics, and you like to educate people. So you probably want to make a difference. You said that increasing low wages was better economically on a global scale, but not on an individual level.

That's the thing, what you describe is the crux of many of our biggest problems - that individual action makes no difference, but collectively it can change the world. For example: one person drives, no climate change - everybody drives, climate changes. One company pays higher wages, no change to the economy, all companies pay higher wages and there's a thriving economy with loads of money swooshing about as people spend it. Of course, you could regulate to force companies to pay more… but you could also do it by 'educating', by setting an example. Imagine the shock on your banker friends faces when you explain why you are paying your employees more. It's got to be worth it just for that, don't you think? It would be the most amazing transformation worthy of a history book.

The news would go viral through the banking world and into the higher echelons of corporations, and you never know, they might start paying their workers more because you educated them that business in a buoyant thriving population is actually more lucrative than business in a world of poor people. And only if they acted together, could they make that happen. That message coming from you would be much more effective than coming from me.

So that is 2 approaches to happiness - a more personal respect for your fellow humans, and all the side benefits that brings, or a grander sense of fulfilment by embarking on a path to change the world for the better. You have to decide what makes you happy, but you know that more money is not the answer.

You may have forgotten what happy is. Trust me, it's great, especially when you don't have financial worries. You don't believe in an afterlife, so this is your only shot.

ReplyVote up (138)down (144)
Original comment

You've asked me to convince you, so I'll give it my best shot. But I warn you, it make take you where you don't expect.

It has always fascinated me why perfectly intelligent people so often cannot see eye to eye. And that everybody thinks they are they always right, me included. But I've come to realise that being right is dependent on your perspective. Do you remember me asking you what outcome you want our economic system to result in? You said outcome 'A', I said outcome 'B'. I suspect that if we both had the same outcome, we would be agreeing on the means to get there. So we are actually both right, our outcomes are different.

So coming back to whether you pay your employees more - your outcome, the result you want to see, is that your bank balance is higher at the end of the year. And of course you'd be right - your bank balance will probably be lower.

But I ask you to question your outcome. You have said in the past that you have plenty of money, but you live a miserable existence. I'm sure I remember you describing your life as: "every day is one less miserable day to endure". I almost felt sorry for you. But notice this… money hasn't made you happy. So whether you make a bit more or a bit less next year, you'll probably still be living a miserable existence. And as an atheist, without heaven to look forward to, that's not ideal.

"So how can paying my employees more make me happy?" Good question. It depends on what happiness means to you, and only you can figure that out. For me in your position, paying employees more would make me feel good because helping people less well off than me, makes me feel good. I'm sure Richard Dawkins can explain why we've evolved to get pleasure from helping others less fortunate. My employees would probably smile more, which is contagious, releasing more endorphins through my body. They may even work harder, and speak good of me behind my back. It's nice to be liked.

But maybe that's too 'new age' or personal for you. You dabble in politics, and you like to educate people. So you probably want to make a difference. You said that increasing low wages was better economically on a global scale, but not on an individual level.

That's the thing, what you describe is the crux of many of our biggest problems - that individual action makes no difference, but collectively it can change the world. For example: one person drives, no climate change - everybody drives, climate changes. One company pays higher wages, no change to the economy, all companies pay higher wages and there's a thriving economy with loads of money swooshing about as people spend it. Of course, you could regulate to force companies to pay more… but you could also do it by 'educating', by setting an example. Imagine the shock on your banker friends faces when you explain why you are paying your employees more. It's got to be worth it just for that, don't you think? It would be the most amazing transformation worthy of a history book.

The news would go viral through the banking world and into the higher echelons of corporations, and you never know, they might start paying their workers more because you educated them that business in a buoyant thriving population is actually more lucrative than business in a world of poor people. And only if they acted together, could they make that happen. That message coming from you would be much more effective than coming from me.

So that is 2 approaches to happiness - a more personal respect for your fellow humans, and all the side benefits that brings, or a grander sense of fulfilment by embarking on a path to change the world for the better. You have to decide what makes you happy, but you know that more money is not the answer.

You may have forgotten what happy is. Trust me, it's great, especially when you don't have financial worries. You don't believe in an afterlife, so this is your only shot.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

"But I ask you to question your outcome. You have said in the past that you have plenty of money, but you live a miserable existence." It's true that I hate my life and wish I was never born; however that has nothing to do with money. Regardless if I'm happy or not has no bearing on my wages because they are mutually exclusive. Usually people need to earn money, not to make them happy, but to pay for the essentials of life.

As for me, I have already earned enough money to pay for my essential needs for the rest of my life. The extra money is not intended to make me happy. It gives me more financial security and the ability to have a better class of life. It removes stress from wondering if I will be able to eat next week or for any time during the rest of my life.

So now that I agreed that I'm not happy and never will be and also tell you that it is independent of the amount of money I make, the big question is what to do with any excessive money that I earn. Currently I have the ability to buy anything I want at any time I want. If I did not have as the financial resources that I have now, I would have to curb my expenses and think about everything that I do. I keep making purchases as new products come out so I can have the best of what is available. I cannot possibly keep everything that I've bought due to limited space so I usually donate the older products to charity. Donating to charity is a good thing right?

What would you personally do with any excessive finances that you have? Do you give them away to your employees or would you give them to less-fortunate family members? I am the most successful member of my family and have uncles, aunts, cousins, 2nd cousins, brother, sister, niece, nephew, and great nephew. They are all struggling in life. Don't you agree that it would be more appropriate for me to give help to my own blood before I give it to anyone else?

"You dabble in politics, and you like to educate people." True and growing up I wanted to be a teacher but decided against it because of their low earning potentials.

Have you ever wondered why billionairres continue to earn more money when they already have enough? I'm not a billionairre but I have the same philosophy as them. They keep working because they like what they do. Mrs. cengland0 will be retiring in October and I've been trying to convince her to continue working but she's not going to do it. The reason is that she doesn't enjoy her job as much as I do. Remember that she works for the agency that hands out those government benefits. Me continuing to work gives me purpose in life and a reason to wake up in the morning. I have no hobbies that I enjoy so if I retired I would just spend most of my time sleeping or watching TV which is not healthy.

ReplyVote up (156)down (133)
Original comment

"But I ask you to question your outcome. You have said in the past that you have plenty of money, but you live a miserable existence." It's true that I hate my life and wish I was never born; however that has nothing to do with money. Regardless if I'm happy or not has no bearing on my wages because they are mutually exclusive. Usually people need to earn money, not to make them happy, but to pay for the essentials of life.

As for me, I have already earned enough money to pay for my essential needs for the rest of my life. The extra money is not intended to make me happy. It gives me more financial security and the ability to have a better class of life. It removes stress from wondering if I will be able to eat next week or for any time during the rest of my life.

So now that I agreed that I'm not happy and never will be and also tell you that it is independent of the amount of money I make, the big question is what to do with any excessive money that I earn. Currently I have the ability to buy anything I want at any time I want. If I did not have as the financial resources that I have now, I would have to curb my expenses and think about everything that I do. I keep making purchases as new products come out so I can have the best of what is available. I cannot possibly keep everything that I've bought due to limited space so I usually donate the older products to charity. Donating to charity is a good thing right?

What would you personally do with any excessive finances that you have? Do you give them away to your employees or would you give them to less-fortunate family members? I am the most successful member of my family and have uncles, aunts, cousins, 2nd cousins, brother, sister, niece, nephew, and great nephew. They are all struggling in life. Don't you agree that it would be more appropriate for me to give help to my own blood before I give it to anyone else?

"You dabble in politics, and you like to educate people." True and growing up I wanted to be a teacher but decided against it because of their low earning potentials.

Have you ever wondered why billionairres continue to earn more money when they already have enough? I'm not a billionairre but I have the same philosophy as them. They keep working because they like what they do. Mrs. cengland0 will be retiring in October and I've been trying to convince her to continue working but she's not going to do it. The reason is that she doesn't enjoy her job as much as I do. Remember that she works for the agency that hands out those government benefits. Me continuing to work gives me purpose in life and a reason to wake up in the morning. I have no hobbies that I enjoy so if I retired I would just spend most of my time sleeping or watching TV which is not healthy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

"" It's true that I hate my life and wish I was never born; however that has nothing to do with money."" bwaaa ha ha ha ha ha.

that made me a bit happier today :)))) so thank you for that.

you should see a psychologist to help you figure out what's wrong with you.

Also, you might have a hormonal imbalance and medicine might help you out with that.

Also, you can try to see how you feel by performing some adrenaline inducing activities, such as bungee jumbing or maybe rollercoasters. Endorphins get released into the body after an adrenaline rush, but it doesn't work for everyone, some people feel absolute terror when the adrenaline rush hits them, so there's that.

Try to take some motorcycle rides, cross country, take some trips, maybe next year after your misses is allready retired. The ride helps a lot of people put their thoughts in order like that.

There's also raping and killing but that's illegal. Do not try that.

ReplyVote up (122)down (106)
Original comment

"" It's true that I hate my life and wish I was never born; however that has nothing to do with money."" bwaaa ha ha ha ha ha.

that made me a bit happier today :)))) so thank you for that.

you should see a psychologist to help you figure out what's wrong with you.

Also, you might have a hormonal imbalance and medicine might help you out with that.

Also, you can try to see how you feel by performing some adrenaline inducing activities, such as bungee jumbing or maybe rollercoasters. Endorphins get released into the body after an adrenaline rush, but it doesn't work for everyone, some people feel absolute terror when the adrenaline rush hits them, so there's that.

Try to take some motorcycle rides, cross country, take some trips, maybe next year after your misses is allready retired. The ride helps a lot of people put their thoughts in order like that.

There's also raping and killing but that's illegal. Do not try that.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

Thanks for your advice but I know exactly what is wrong with me. I don't feel the need to share those details with you so I'll just keep you guessing. At least I know what my problems are but you still think you don't have any issues. That's what is really ironic.

ReplyVote up (118)down (122)
Original comment

Thanks for your advice but I know exactly what is wrong with me. I don't feel the need to share those details with you so I'll just keep you guessing. At least I know what my problems are but you still think you don't have any issues. That's what is really ironic.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

you're making assumptions and jumping to conclusions again.

Of course i have issues, i think that's obious to anyone reading some of my posts, but i don't care because i don't feel like killing myself instead of waking up in the morning (i can make assumptions too).

The ssues i might have don't impare me from being a functional member of society and the sporadic use of profanity helps me vent which makes me feel good.

I don't care about the reasons for which you want to kill yourself, i just proposed some solution to get you to fix them.

Have you tried some of the things i suggested?

Don't tell me you're depressed because you don't have children and you've decided to substitute kids with ducks...

ReplyVote up (155)down (122)
Original comment

you're making assumptions and jumping to conclusions again.

Of course i have issues, i think that's obious to anyone reading some of my posts, but i don't care because i don't feel like killing myself instead of waking up in the morning (i can make assumptions too).

The ssues i might have don't impare me from being a functional member of society and the sporadic use of profanity helps me vent which makes me feel good.

I don't care about the reasons for which you want to kill yourself, i just proposed some solution to get you to fix them.

Have you tried some of the things i suggested?

Don't tell me you're depressed because you don't have children and you've decided to substitute kids with ducks...

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

Who said I wanted to kill myself? I have accomplished most of my goals so if I wanted to kill myself, I'm sure I would have already done it by now. Hating my life and wishing I was never born does not mean I'm going to take my own life.

"Don't tell me you're depressed because you don't have children and you've decided to substitute kids with ducks." Not having children is a choice. It's a decision I wish more people took seriously because I know too many people that shouldn't have had any children.

I like all sorts of animals and that's not limited to just ducks. I'm even a vegetarian so I make sure no animals were killed on my account when I could easily survive by eating fruits, grains, and vegetables.

You know that I like ducks because I've mentioned before that I've raised about a hundred of them and kept several as pets. I've had other pets too. My current pet is a Jenday Conure. This is not a substitute for not having kids. You may find this hard to believe but some people have both kids and pets because they have nothing to do with each other.

I might be a little depressed but I'm not on any medication for it. It doesn't prevent me from performing my job duties or any other necessary tasks. Don't know why you think that is a problem becasue there are millions of people that are depressed. At least I don't take it out on other people by calling them names or using profanity like you do.

ReplyVote up (125)down (153)
Original comment

Who said I wanted to kill myself? I have accomplished most of my goals so if I wanted to kill myself, I'm sure I would have already done it by now. Hating my life and wishing I was never born does not mean I'm going to take my own life.

"Don't tell me you're depressed because you don't have children and you've decided to substitute kids with ducks." Not having children is a choice. It's a decision I wish more people took seriously because I know too many people that shouldn't have had any children.

I like all sorts of animals and that's not limited to just ducks. I'm even a vegetarian so I make sure no animals were killed on my account when I could easily survive by eating fruits, grains, and vegetables.

You know that I like ducks because I've mentioned before that I've raised about a hundred of them and kept several as pets. I've had other pets too. My current pet is a Jenday Conure. This is not a substitute for not having kids. You may find this hard to believe but some people have both kids and pets because they have nothing to do with each other.

I might be a little depressed but I'm not on any medication for it. It doesn't prevent me from performing my job duties or any other necessary tasks. Don't know why you think that is a problem becasue there are millions of people that are depressed. At least I don't take it out on other people by calling them names or using profanity like you do.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1314 days ago)

yeah you don't use profanity, you just troll.

ReplyVote up (125)down (133)
Original comment

yeah you don't use profanity, you just troll.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

DAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYUUU UUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMMMMM DDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW WGGGGGGGGG!!

you really gave it to him :))))))))

ReplyVote up (137)down (145)
Original comment

DAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYUUU UUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMMMMM DDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW WGGGGGGGGG!!

you really gave it to him :))))))))

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

i'll be out of a job in no time, people will riot, governments will fall.

Sounds like a terrible decision to open the borders and remove the minimum wage.

You're right to be anti globalisation and for raising the minimum wage cengland zero, I can't believe i agree with you on this one.

ReplyVote up (165)down (211)
Original comment

i'll be out of a job in no time, people will riot, governments will fall.

Sounds like a terrible decision to open the borders and remove the minimum wage.

You're right to be anti globalisation and for raising the minimum wage cengland zero, I can't believe i agree with you on this one.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

That's one subject you finally agree with. Now on to the others.... Which one do you want to tackle to agree on next?

ReplyVote up (157)down (160)
Original comment

That's one subject you finally agree with. Now on to the others.... Which one do you want to tackle to agree on next?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

legalised bribery?

ReplyVote up (159)down (173)
Original comment

legalised bribery?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

That is not a conversation that we have discussed and disagreed with yet.

Maybe I'll just wait until a controversal subject comes up again and I'm able to educate you why things work they way they do and hopefully convince you it's the best solution discovered so far.

ReplyVote up (152)down (191)
Original comment

That is not a conversation that we have discussed and disagreed with yet.

Maybe I'll just wait until a controversal subject comes up again and I'm able to educate you why things work they way they do and hopefully convince you it's the best solution discovered so far.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

i doubt bribery corruption and legalised bribery is ever the best sollution to anything.

ReplyVote up (138)down (134)
Original comment

i doubt bribery corruption and legalised bribery is ever the best sollution to anything.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

From what I heard, there was a lot of lobbying going on to pass our 13th ammendment to abolish slavery. There were "negotiations" with state leaders to convince them to ratify the ammendment. Sometimes it turns out to be a good thing, right?

ReplyVote up (137)down (146)
Original comment

From what I heard, there was a lot of lobbying going on to pass our 13th ammendment to abolish slavery. There were "negotiations" with state leaders to convince them to ratify the ammendment. Sometimes it turns out to be a good thing, right?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

well if you put it like that, yes, sometimes it is, however most times it's not. The motive shouldn't excuse the means.

I'm going to consider that an exception from the rule and the ony one so far.

do you have any other examples?

ReplyVote up (166)down (130)
Original comment

well if you put it like that, yes, sometimes it is, however most times it's not. The motive shouldn't excuse the means.

I'm going to consider that an exception from the rule and the ony one so far.

do you have any other examples?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

In each case, the people paying for the lobbyists think the reasons are justified.

ReplyVote up (137)down (137)
Original comment

In each case, the people paying for the lobbyists think the reasons are justified.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

well, there's not "either case" , it's the slavery example and the rest of the reasons for which people lobby and use legalised bribery to modify laws and regulations. Of course they think the investment is justified if it's going to increase profits.

But do you have another example where lobby corruption and legalised bribery was used to do good for the citizens of the USA??

i would be surprised if you did.

ReplyVote up (141)down (134)
Original comment

well, there's not "either case" , it's the slavery example and the rest of the reasons for which people lobby and use legalised bribery to modify laws and regulations. Of course they think the investment is justified if it's going to increase profits.

But do you have another example where lobby corruption and legalised bribery was used to do good for the citizens of the USA??

i would be surprised if you did.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1314 days ago)

Like I said, this is all a matter of opinion. I'm sure there are people paying lobbyists to try to keep the minimum wage where it is instead of increasing it to $10.10/hour. If this is successful, then it might have been a good thing. You disagree but you also don't own your own business and you don't hire people so you really have no horse in this race. I see the increase of minimum wage causing job losses and inflation but you see it as getting people out of poverty. It will actually do both. So you would prefer that half of the people that make minimum wage get an increase while the other half gets unemployed. I would rather see everyone employed even if that means they make less than the minimum. So we see this issue a bit differently so the paid lobbyists are representing the small and large companies which is a benefit to our society.

ReplyVote up (143)down (137)
Original comment

Like I said, this is all a matter of opinion. I'm sure there are people paying lobbyists to try to keep the minimum wage where it is instead of increasing it to $10.10/hour. If this is successful, then it might have been a good thing. You disagree but you also don't own your own business and you don't hire people so you really have no horse in this race. I see the increase of minimum wage causing job losses and inflation but you see it as getting people out of poverty. It will actually do both. So you would prefer that half of the people that make minimum wage get an increase while the other half gets unemployed. I would rather see everyone employed even if that means they make less than the minimum. So we see this issue a bit differently so the paid lobbyists are representing the small and large companies which is a benefit to our society.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1314 days ago)

you are making unfounded assumptions and drawing impertinent conclusions again.

increase in the minimum wage doesn't mean half the people will be employed whilst the other have will be unemployed.

There are very detailed studies about the consequences that come with the increase of the minimum wage and i'm sure you don't need me to give you a link for that, we've talked about this several fekin times in the past.

didn't we agree that you and i are both anti globalisation and for increasing the minimum wage? it was just some posts UP! what happend? how did you change your mind so fast?

ReplyVote up (134)down (127)
Original comment

you are making unfounded assumptions and drawing impertinent conclusions again.

increase in the minimum wage doesn't mean half the people will be employed whilst the other have will be unemployed.

There are very detailed studies about the consequences that come with the increase of the minimum wage and i'm sure you don't need me to give you a link for that, we've talked about this several fekin times in the past.

didn't we agree that you and i are both anti globalisation and for increasing the minimum wage? it was just some posts UP! what happend? how did you change your mind so fast?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1314 days ago)

That's not what we agreed to. Your reading skills need improvement again.

We agreed about being anti-globalization so we should continue to keep our borders closed. You were the one that assumed we agreed on the minimum wage issue.

Why are you against me providing you a link to the study on what would happen if the minimum wage is increased to $10.10 per hour? You claim you know what would happen but you are wrong according to the last study.

Anyway, here's the link to the latest congressional budget office report on the effect of raising the minimum wage. LINK

It says that it would be likely to reduce the number of workers by 1 million. Only 19% of the increases in wages will go to familys in poverty because the majority of those jobs are done by familys not in poverty. Out of 45 million people who are below the poverty level, only 900,000 people will go above it with the increase of the minimum wage.

So there are the facts. Remove 1 million from the workforce to give 900,000 people out of poverty. This is direct from congressional budget office. Sorry to burst your bubble on this (not really).

ReplyVote up (173)down (134)
Original comment

That's not what we agreed to. Your reading skills need improvement again.

We agreed about being anti-globalization so we should continue to keep our borders closed. You were the one that assumed we agreed on the minimum wage issue.

Why are you against me providing you a link to the study on what would happen if the minimum wage is increased to $10.10 per hour? You claim you know what would happen but you are wrong according to the last study.

Anyway, here's the link to the latest congressional budget office report on the effect of raising the minimum wage. LINK

It says that it would be likely to reduce the number of workers by 1 million. Only 19% of the increases in wages will go to familys in poverty because the majority of those jobs are done by familys not in poverty. Out of 45 million people who are below the poverty level, only 900,000 people will go above it with the increase of the minimum wage.

So there are the facts. Remove 1 million from the workforce to give 900,000 people out of poverty. This is direct from congressional budget office. Sorry to burst your bubble on this (not really).

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
tornadodog tornadodog (1314 days ago)

cary's dream job hope it makes you smile if only they could be saved LINK

ReplyVote up (183)down (156)
Original comment

cary's dream job hope it makes you smile if only they could be saved LINK

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1314 days ago)

you didn't burst anything, it just depends on what your sources are and the ideology you follow:

""Over all, the budget office estimated that lifting the minimum wage to $10.10 and indexing it to inflation would reduce total employment by about 0.3 percent, or 500,000 workers. But it cautioned that the estimate was imprecise , with t he job losses likely to fall in a range from practically nothing to one million .""

LINK

“The C.B.O. made it absolutely clear: raising the minimum wage would lift almost one million Americans out of poverty, increase the pay of low-income workers by $31 billion and help build an economy that works for everyone,” said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the minority leader.

Same source.

And then there's people who think what you just said and what the report found is a myth LINK

Just like the universal basic income, we would have to wait and see what the REAL effects of raising the minimum wage will be, otherwise it's a "he said she said" game, and even though your source is official, it's still susceptible to legalised bribery, especially with a website that ends on dot gov. So i'm not convinced, the bubble lives on.

ReplyVote up (139)down (167)
Original comment

you didn't burst anything, it just depends on what your sources are and the ideology you follow:

""Over all, the budget office estimated that lifting the minimum wage to $10.10 and indexing it to inflation would reduce total employment by about 0.3 percent, or 500,000 workers. But it cautioned that the estimate was imprecise , with t he job losses likely to fall in a range from practically nothing to one million .""

LINK

“The C.B.O. made it absolutely clear: raising the minimum wage would lift almost one million Americans out of poverty, increase the pay of low-income workers by $31 billion and help build an economy that works for everyone,” said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the minority leader.

Same source.

And then there's people who think what you just said and what the report found is a myth LINK

Just like the universal basic income, we would have to wait and see what the REAL effects of raising the minimum wage will be, otherwise it's a "he said she said" game, and even though your source is official, it's still susceptible to legalised bribery, especially with a website that ends on dot gov. So i'm not convinced, the bubble lives on.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1314 days ago)

You failed to look at the "Likely" number of job losses. It's in the table under the paragraph that you quoted. It says 1,000,000 are likely to be lost if the wage is increased to $10.10.

Regarding the myth link that you provided, who are you going to believe? An unbiased Congressional Budget Office report or a webpage created by a biased NELP organization (National Employee Law Program). One of that site's first sentences, "Today, the most rigorous research shows little evidence of job reductions from a higher minimum wage" is technically right but wrong in the spirit of this discussion. They mention that it has little effect on job growth and that might be true but it's the minimum wage earners that will lose their jobs while higher skilled labor jobs will still continue to grow. It's minimal because very few people actually make minimum wage so it's a very deceptive way to use the data.

I'm not willing to use the wait and see method. We better be sure about this before raising the wage because the report does believe that 900,000 people will be out of poverty while 1,000,000 current minimum wage earners are likely to lose their job. Even if you were right and only 500,000 jobs were lost, that's still 56% of the amount of people that will be taken out of poverty. That is unacceptable in my opinion.

ReplyVote up (150)down (143)
Original comment

You failed to look at the "Likely" number of job losses. It's in the table under the paragraph that you quoted. It says 1,000,000 are likely to be lost if the wage is increased to $10.10.

Regarding the myth link that you provided, who are you going to believe? An unbiased Congressional Budget Office report or a webpage created by a biased NELP organization (National Employee Law Program). One of that site's first sentences, "Today, the most rigorous research shows little evidence of job reductions from a higher minimum wage" is technically right but wrong in the spirit of this discussion. They mention that it has little effect on job growth and that might be true but it's the minimum wage earners that will lose their jobs while higher skilled labor jobs will still continue to grow. It's minimal because very few people actually make minimum wage so it's a very deceptive way to use the data.

I'm not willing to use the wait and see method. We better be sure about this before raising the wage because the report does believe that 900,000 people will be out of poverty while 1,000,000 current minimum wage earners are likely to lose their job. Even if you were right and only 500,000 jobs were lost, that's still 56% of the amount of people that will be taken out of poverty. That is unacceptable in my opinion.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1314 days ago)
Latest comment:

the cbo report does not mention who wrote it, but it does mention it's sources, sources that are highly criticised for not being the latest ones in the economical studies made by concerned economists and institutions that sympathise with both the left and the right. The report itself says that the data is imprecise. The organisation is allegedly unbiased and not unbiased beyond a reasonable doubt.

56% trumps nill.

The report does not believe ""900,000 people will be out of poverty while 1,000,000 current minimum wage earners are likely to lose their job"" the report clearly sates the following ""Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger ; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers."" meaning that the ANONYMOUS AUTHOR/s thinks that there's a 66% chance of job losses between nill and 1 million. It does not show the methodology used, it just makes a vague claim and at the same time uses language that might get people to believe the claim is 100% acurate; very manipulative tactics that lead me to believe legalised bribery was involved here.

I'm not willing to use the wait and see method either, i want the minimum wage to be raised NOW.

And weren't you suppose to provide another example for the beneficial effects of corruption and legalised bribery, apart from the very old slavery example?

ReplyVote up (165)down (146)
Original comment
Latest comment:

the cbo report does not mention who wrote it, but it does mention it's sources, sources that are highly criticised for not being the latest ones in the economical studies made by concerned economists and institutions that sympathise with both the left and the right. The report itself says that the data is imprecise. The organisation is allegedly unbiased and not unbiased beyond a reasonable doubt.

56% trumps nill.

The report does not believe ""900,000 people will be out of poverty while 1,000,000 current minimum wage earners are likely to lose their job"" the report clearly sates the following ""Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger ; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers."" meaning that the ANONYMOUS AUTHOR/s thinks that there's a 66% chance of job losses between nill and 1 million. It does not show the methodology used, it just makes a vague claim and at the same time uses language that might get people to believe the claim is 100% acurate; very manipulative tactics that lead me to believe legalised bribery was involved here.

I'm not willing to use the wait and see method either, i want the minimum wage to be raised NOW.

And weren't you suppose to provide another example for the beneficial effects of corruption and legalised bribery, apart from the very old slavery example?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

well NAFTA did open trade with mexico and flooded the market with subsidised GM corn puting mexican farmers out of business.

it only seems fair for them to come to the US and rob you.

just saying.

ReplyVote up (165)down (151)
Original comment

well NAFTA did open trade with mexico and flooded the market with subsidised GM corn puting mexican farmers out of business.

it only seems fair for them to come to the US and rob you.

just saying.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1315 days ago)

My friend Google says that they also grow sugarcane, sorghum , wheat , tomatoes, bananas, chili peppers, oranges , lemons, limes, mangos, other tropical fruits , beans, barley , avocados, blue agave and coffee.

As you might already be aware, the USA is addicted to oil and we are still dependent on foreign companies to supply us. Our government subsidized corn policy was intended to help us become more independent on foreign oil. Almost all of our gas has 10% ethanol in it which is made from that corn. There are some exceptions such as aviation and boating fuels.

ReplyVote up (150)down (203)
Original comment

My friend Google says that they also grow sugarcane, sorghum , wheat , tomatoes, bananas, chili peppers, oranges , lemons, limes, mangos, other tropical fruits , beans, barley , avocados, blue agave and coffee.

As you might already be aware, the USA is addicted to oil and we are still dependent on foreign companies to supply us. Our government subsidized corn policy was intended to help us become more independent on foreign oil. Almost all of our gas has 10% ethanol in it which is made from that corn. There are some exceptions such as aviation and boating fuels.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1315 days ago)

yeah, i'm sure that's why they subsidise corn. Not like corn was the main crop of Mexico. Let them eat mangos and blue agave.

Anyway, i don't feel like dealing with your troll game today.

ReplyVote up (180)down (168)
Original comment

yeah, i'm sure that's why they subsidise corn. Not like corn was the main crop of Mexico. Let them eat mangos and blue agave.

Anyway, i don't feel like dealing with your troll game today.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1316 days ago)

not to mention that most were brought there as children and they had no control over their citisenzhip or legality.

ReplyVote up (145)down (147)
Original comment

not to mention that most were brought there as children and they had no control over their citisenzhip or legality.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: kat (1316 days ago)

I can only agree with ceoengland. Sad but true.

ReplyVote up (157)down (151)
Original comment

I can only agree with ceoengland. Sad but true.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: godisdead (1316 days ago)

agreed.

ReplyVote up (152)down (186)
Original comment

agreed.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Sat (1316 days ago)

disagree

ReplyVote up (146)down (149)
Original comment

disagree

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
David Pakman - Trump made millions laundering drug money
David Pakman - Trump made millions laundering drug money
Norilsk, Russia's most toxic city
Norilsk, Russia's most toxic city
New NASA images of Larsen C iceberg
New NASA images of Larsen C iceberg
Kid's close shave with a truck, Norway
Kid's close shave with a truck, Norway
How Brexit could make food prices skyrocket
How Brexit could make food prices skyrocket